From: Eugene Leitl (eugene.leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de)
Date: Wed Nov 25 1998 - 16:06:55 MST
Brian Atkins writes:
> My take is:
>
> a) why blow more $$$ for hard drives or cd-r media when you've
> already got the bits in digital format on the original cds.
I don't want lugging around some 100-odd jewel boxes, but a digest of
what I actually listen to. I could destill that to CD-R, but I want
the data to be stored in a compact single unit, r/w storage which
can accomodate random audio snippets and algorithmic access to sound
(context-sensitivity, speech/cue-triggered retrieval, etc.). Actually,
CDs are just but an icing on the cake, all I care about are documents.
As to compactness, a HD packed in rugged frame is one of the densest
and most convenient storage media -- and you can always DAT it if
you're really paranoid.
> b) whether you copy the media or not, why do you still want
> to be stuck carting it around with you around the planet- even
> if you reduce the amount of atoms required by converting to
> mp3, you still are going to be lugging extra junk around with
> you.
I'm perfectly satisfied with a standard MIT wearable design
offering about 24 h untethered operation capability (say, a
Lizzy for 2-3 k$), with a Faxview-like display and about a
4 GByte HD and IrDA (or future Bluetooth) to dock into the
main machine. Of course having all 4 GByte as solid-state
would be simply wonderful, but we're a few years off that
still. Speaking of solid-state storage, now's that a great
use for WSI.
You do use suitcases when you travel? Why that extra junk?
> Need to stop carting atoms around!
Start applying the zen knife to yourself, then.
ciao,
'gene
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:51 MST